| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)fr> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: additional json functionality |
| Date: | 2013-11-17 22:31:17 |
| Message-ID: | 528943B5.1000809@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/17/2013 04:51 PM, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> writes:
>> You know that both types support scalar values right? 'a'::JSON works now,
>> and 'a'::hstore works with the WIP patch. For that reason I would not think
>> that "doc" or "obj" would be good choices.
> I'm wondering about just pushing hstore in core (even if technically
> still an extension, install it by default, like we do for PLpgSQL), and
> calling it a day.
That would be one of the silliest and most short-sighted decisions we
have made in many years, IMNSHO. The demand for strong JSON support is
enormous. I don't think I have ever received as many positive comments
on any other feature I have worked on in the last 9 years. What these
people want is not something jsonish, they want json, pure and simple.
And they want it fast and featured and efficient.
Much as I love hstore, it isn't json, and so it won't satisfy that demand.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2013-11-17 22:44:23 | Re: additional json functionality |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2013-11-17 22:28:35 | Re: additional json functionality |